China is getting more worried about AI risks and national security. This was the most striking part of China’s new draft export controls on AI and other technologies: “Technologies proposed for control in this round, such as AI-driven autonomous malware generation and mutation technologies, could be used to attack sensitive systems, including national critical information infrastructure, national defense and military industries, and core government operations, or to circumvent national security defenses. If acquired by non-state actors or malicious entities, these technologies could pose threats to national security and the collective security of humanity.” Especially that last line: 可能对国家安全和人类共同安全造成危害

My initial reaction to China's new AI export controls: They're confusing because they seem to be creating restrictions for China AI exports while simultaneously signaling continued "automatic" approval for open-source models. I don't think it's about leverage. I think China is generally worried about cyberattack potential for Chinese AI systems and don't want these proliferating outside China and then potentially hitting Chinese critical infrastructure or government systems. So the toughest restrictions--the prohibitions 禁止出口--are on AI autonomous malicious code generation. But there are also broad restrictions 限制出口 on AI models of above certain performance thresholds. Ministry of Commerce later said open-source models would be "automatically" approved upon registration, but then it does lay the groundwork for a more systematic monitoring of models and possible real restrictions later on. The part that's confusing to me is that AI systems that can help produce malware basically include all the top Chinese open-source models. And yet they're simultaneously "automatically" approved? It seems like this set of new export controls were created by one part of the bureaucracy that's worried about proliferation of harmful AI capabilities but then another part is trying to say "but actually we still support open-source." This is at least my initial reaction--my views may change as I re-read and re-analyze.